Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39563410›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2024

Distribution and predictors of haemophilia-related costs in the United Kingdom: analysis of the CHESS I and CHESS II burden of illness studies.

Ione Woollacott, Amit Chhabra, Tom Burke, Jack Brownrigg, Lucy Richardson, Enrico Ferri Grazzi, Jamie O'Hara, Josie Godfrey, Michael Laffan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Ione WoollacottFormerly Pfizer Limited, Tadworth, Surrey, UK.
Amit ChhabraFormerly Pfizer Limited, Tadworth, Surrey, UK.
Tom BurkeHCD Economics, Mere House, Brook St, Knutsford, UK. Tom.burke@primeglobalpeople.com.
Jack BrownriggFormerly Pfizer Limited, Tadworth, Surrey, UK.
Lucy RichardsonFormerly Pfizer Limited, Tadworth, Surrey, UK.
Enrico Ferri GrazziHCD Economics, Mere House, Brook St, Knutsford, UK.
Jamie O'HaraFaculty of Health and Social Care, University of Chester, Chester, UK.
Josie GodfreyJG Zebra Consulting Ltd, London, UK.
Michael LaffanCentre for Haematology, Imperial College London, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFew studies have evaluated direct medical or societal costs of haemophilia in the United Kingdom (UK), and how patient characteristics impact future costs is uncertain. Cost predictors were identified and examined using cross-sectional data from the CHESS I and II studies.

methodsPatient- and physician-reported outcomes were analysed for UK adult males aged ≤ 65, with haemophilia A or B and no recent clinical trial participation. Demographics, haemophilia type and severity, inhibitors, annual bleed rate (ABR), problem joints (PJs), treatment type, and comorbidities, were utilised in regression analyses. Health-related quality of life was assessed using EQ-5D. Generalised linear models estimated expected non-drug haemophilia-related direct medical costs (DMC) and societal costs (non-drug DMC, direct non-medical and indirect costs). Average marginal effects (AMEs) determined predictors of cost.

resultsCosts for 378 patients were analysed. Mean age was 33 years and 79% (299) had haemophilia A. Mean annual per-patient DMC were £165,001 (including factor treatment costs) and £4,091 when excluding factor replacement treatment costs (non-drug DMC). Mean annual per-patient non-treatment societal costs were £11,550 (standard deviation £20,171) among those with data available (n = 51). Number of PJs, ABR, and treatment regimen were significant determinants of haemophilia-related non-drug DMC (all P < 0.001). Non-drug DMC increased as ABR increased (AMEs were £2,018 for ABR 1-5, £3,101 for ABR 6-10 and £5,785 for ABR ≥ 11, vs. ABR 0) and by £1,869 per additional PJ. No significant predictors of non-drug haemophilia-related societal costs were identified. Mean EQ-5D score was 0.66, with lower scores observed for people with haemophilia B (0.48) compared with haemophilia A (0.71) and with increasing haemophilia severity.

conclusionsUK direct medical and societal costs of haemophilia are substantial. Non-drug DMC were particularly associated with ABR and number of PJs. These findings may be useful for real-world evaluations of the economic burden of haemophilia in the UK.

Indexed as

Cost of IllnessHemophilia AAdultCross-Sectional StudiesHealth Care CostsHemophilia BHumansMaleMiddle AgedQuality of LifeUnited KingdomYoung AdultAnnual bleed rateBurdenCostHaemophiliaProblem jointQuality of life

Identifiers

PMID39563410
PMCPMC11577900

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.